1951-11-21

Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Last night it was announced over the radio, and later press dispatches carried the information, that permanent quarters are to be provided in Europe for the 27th brigade at an estimated cost of between $5 million and $10 million. Then this morning's radio carried dispatches that in Rotterdam today the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Clax-ton) had announced that Canada is to foot the bill, to use the words employed, to build four or five new aerodromes in western Europe to field an 11 squadron jet air division capable of providing tactical support for a full-fledged army. I quote from the Canadian Press dispatch as follows:
Claxton made the announcement simultaneously with the arrival of a 500-man contingent of Canada's 27th infantry brigade earmarked for General Eisenhower's North Atlantic army. The Canadian defence minister told the press conference, attended by 50 Canadian, American. British, Netherlands, French, and other correspondents, that Canada will be sending enough arms for another two European divisions, making a total of five. The aerodromes, he said, will cost in the vicinity of $100 million.
I raise a question of privilege in regard to this statement	because it involves an
extremely important announcement of policy that I submit should have been given to the people's representatives in this house when a decision of that kind was made. After all, this whole subject was under discussion in this house a short time ago. If it was the intention of the government to embark on the building of airfields at the cost of the Canadian taxpayer, then most certainly the people's representatives should have been informed so that there might have been a proper discussion of the subject.
I must say that I was under the impression, and I am sure that many other hon. members were also, that the construction of installations required for participation in NATO plans in Europe under General Eisenhower would be under the North Atlantic Treaty Organization itself. I do not imagine that any hon. member was in any doubt that Canada
along with other nations would be called upon to pay its share of the various expenses that would be involved.
But when we start building aerodromes and permanent barracks, then we become land owners in a big way in Europe. The question arises as to where this same situation may arise next. A hundred million dollars is not a small sum of money. I submit that this is the sort of thing that indicates the government's tendency to disregard completely the fact that it is the executive of this parliament supported by the representatives in this house and that, no matter what majority the government may command, it is the duty of the government as the executive to report to the people's representatives when such large sums of money are being spent and when new policies are being evolved.


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, before I attempt to discuss in the house what the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) may have said I shall make sure of what he did say. I would be very much surprised if it was what the hon. gentleman has referred to because no such policy has been decided upon by the Canadian government. The Canadian government realizes that no moneys can be spent without appropriations1 approved by this house. Whenever the government has any recommendation to make it will submit it to the house and attempt to justify the reasons for the expenditure proposed.



RADIO BROADCASTING


[Stage Direction]
. Mr. W. A. Robinson (Simcoe East) presented the first report of the special committee on radio broadcasting, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.


Mr. W. G. Weir (Portage-Neepawa):: I move:
That the following members comprise the special committee on defence expenditures as provided for in the resolution passed by the house on Tuesday, November 13, namely: Messrs. Balcom, Blanchette, Campney, Cavers, Churchill, Croll, Drew, Fulton, Gauthier (Portneuf), George, Harkness, Henderson, Hunter, James, Jones, Macdonnell 'Greenwood).

Questions
MacDougall, McCusker, MeHraith, Pearkes, Pinard, Power, Stewart (Winnipeg North), Stick, Thomas, Weaver.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. Harkness:: How many bushels of No. 5, No. 6, and feed grains of wheat were held by the wheat board at October 15, 1951, or the most recent date for which figures are available?


Mr. Howe:: The information required by question No. 1 was given in a return to the house that I made last Monday and is published in the Hansard which appeared on Tuesday. The information was given as of October 20, and that is the only difference between the information given.and the question asked by the hon. member. I would ask that the question be dropped.


Mr. Speaker:: Dropped.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Was the Minister of Trade and Commerce referring to the return given in this house on Monday last, November 19? The minister has said that this question was answered by a return or a report he gave to the house.


Clarence Decatur Howe: On Monday.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Was it Monday?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Then, if that is so, the return does not answer the question. It merely states there were 70 million bushels of non-mill-able wheat. My question asks for the number of bushels each of Nos. 5 and 6 and feed at whatever was the most convenient date. That of course would include wheat in those grades which have been taken in this year, and not merely wheat transferred from last year's ' account. I should like to have it restored to the order paper.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It has been a practice for many years to refuse information as to the current marketing position of wheat, for reasons my hon. friend will understand. We do not wish to give our customers our stock position. If we did, it might easily have a bearish effect on the market. Therefore the information cannot be given in the form asked.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, we have had numerous returns giving the amount of wheat held at various periods by the wheat board throughout the year. I can see no reason why this particular question could not be answered in view of the numerous other questions in this regard which have been answered.


FISHERIES PATROL SERVICE, P. E. I.  ILLICIT LOBSTER FISHING
Mr. McLure:: 1.	How many cases of illicit lobster fishing did the fisheries patrol service report in Prince Edward Island during the present year to date?
2.	How many in each of the counties of Queens, Prince and Kings?
3.	How many prosecutions were imposed?
4.	How much gear was seized?
5.	How many cases of lobsters (illicit pack) were seized?
6.	How many men are employed in the fisheries patrol service in each of the above-mentioned counties?
7.	Does the R.C.M.P. assist in the patrol service, and in what manner?


Mr. Mayhew:: 1.	269.
2.	Queens, 63; Prince, 162; Kings, 44.
3.	Queens, 7; Prince, 18; Kings, 27: 52.
4.	5,097 traps, 41,333 fathoms of rope.
5.	Illicit canned lobster, nil, but 128 14-oz. tins of fresh lobster meat were seized.
6.	Fisheries Officers
Full Part War- Guard- Boat
Time Time*	dens	ians	CrewsQueens	2	2	-	-	5Prince	3	4	8	-	7Kings	3	1	-	2	48	7	8	2	16Total	41* These	men are	primarily inspection	officers
but are used part time for protection duties as required.
7. Yes, on request. Because of their regular duties services are requested only in exceptional circumstances.


TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY
Mr. Boisvert:: What is the cost per mile of the trans-Canada highway under construction for (a) grading; (b) paving?


Mr. Winters:: (a)	Final figures are not yet available on the cost per mile of grading. From present information, it is estimated that the cost will vary from approximately $14,000 per mile in the prairie provinces to $80,000 per mile in some sections of Ontario and $450,000 per mile in the Fraser canyon sections of British Columbia.
(b)	Final figures are not available on the cost per mile of paving. From present information, it is estimated that for plant-mix bituminous paving, 24 feet wide, the cost

will vary from $15,000 to $20,000 per mile depending upon cost of suitable aggregate and cost of transportation of other materials, and exclusive of base course or foundation construction.	\


TRADE UNIONS, CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE, BOARDS OF TRADE  BROADCASTS SINCE JANUARY 1, 1951
Mr. Noseworlhy:: 1.	How many broadcasts have been given by or in the interest of trade unions, since January 1, 1951, over (a) Canadian Broadcasting Corporation stations; (b) local stations?
2.	What is the total broadcasting time of these broadcasts?
3.	How many broadcasts have been given by or in the interest of chambers of commerce and boards of trade, since January 1, 1951, over (a) Canadian Broadcasting Corporation stations; (b) local stations?
4.	What is the total broadcasting time of these broadcasts?


Mr. McCann:: 1.	(a) Five; (b) no information.
2.	C.B.C. stations; one hour five minutes.
3.	(a) Six; (b) no information.
4.	C.B.C. stations; one hour fifteen minutes.
Questions



GERMANS AND LATVIANS


Mr. Browne (Si. John's West):: 1.	How many persons of (a) German; (b) Latvian nationality, have entered Canada and taken up residence in Newfoundland, since January 1, 1950?
2.	Have they been screened to ascertain if there were any former nazis or nazi collaborators amongst them?


Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):: 1.	Information is not available as to
nationality of immigrants destined to any province. During period January 1, 1950, to September 30,	1951, nine immigrants of
German racial origin and 38 immigrants of Latvian racial origin entered Newfoundland for permanent residence.
2.	Yes.



HOG MARKETING


Mr. Fair:: 1.	What was the price of top grade hogs on the
(a)	Edmonton; (b) Winnipeg; (c) Toronto markets, on the 1st and 15th of each month to date in 1951?
2.	What percentage of hogs marketed on each of the above dates was placed in the top grade?


Mr. McCubbin:: 1 and 2.
Average weekly price of A grade hogs and percentage of same marketed. (Sows and stags excluded)
Average price	Edmonton	Winnipeg	Toronto	for week	Percent	Price	Percent	Price	Percent	Priceending	Grade A	Grade A	Grade A	Grade A	Grade A	Grade AJan. 6	. 25-0	$31.25	23-5	$30.25	35-7	$31.5013	. 27-6	31.25	25-6	30.83	38-0	31.50Feb. 3	. 28-0	33.50	24-7	32.17	38-3	33.3717	. 29-5	35.25	25-9	33.50	38-5	35.50Mar. 3	. 29-1	36.00	25-3	34.00	38-4	35.0017	. 26-8	35.00	26-3	33.83	370	34.75Apr. 7	. 27-6	32.75	27-9	31.75	37-0	34.0021	. 25-8	29.75	27-3	28.83	37-9	30.00May 5	. 26-1	30.75	24-9	29.66	36 1	34.0019	. 28-3	34.20	25-3	32.00	36-7	33.50June 2	. 24-6	35.60	26-0	32.83	36-8	35.7516	. 25-5	38.25	24-7	36.16	36-6	38.25July 7	. 24-6	39.75	25-2	36.87	38-1	39.0021	. 21-7	39.00	23-3	38.00	361	40.00Aug. 4	. 24-1	38.00	23-9	37.83	37-6	36.5018	. 24-6	36.40	24-2	36.00	37-9	35.75Sept. 1	. 27-3	36.25	24-4	36.00	39-7	36.2515	. 25-8	34.00	27-3	34.50	39-3	32.66Oct. 6	. 260	32.50	260	29.17	36-8	30.6720	. 23-6	31.75	28-1	29.62	35-7	29.50
1226

Questions



CORPS OF COMMISSIONAIRES-WAGE SCALES

Mr. McLure:: 1.	What is the scale of wages paid to veterans employed with the Canadian corps of commissionaires?
2.	Is the came scale of wages applicable for similar positions in the different provinces?


Mr. Cote (Verdun-La Salle):: 1 andi 2. Members of the Canadian, corps of commissionaires are employed by a number of departments of the government of Canada, but a considerable number are also privately employed.
The wage rates of commissionaires employed by the government of Canada are established by the governor in council on the recommendation of the department concerned, concurred in by the Department of Labour and approved by treasury board, in accordance with the rate prevailing in the area of employment for the type of work performed, with a maximum of $1 per hour.



RADIO LICENCES


Mr. McLure:: 1.	Were any persons in the counties of Prince, Queens, Kings, Prince Edward Island, prosecuted for not procuring radio licences to date in 1951?
2.	If so, how many in each county?


Mr. Benidickson:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Prince, 68; Queens, 67; Kings, 63.



NATIONAL REVENUE


Mr. Balcom:: How many (a) permanent; (b) temporary employees of the Halifax and Sydney income tax branches of the Department of National Revenue, were (i) released; (ii) down-graded, in 1950 and 1951, as a result of the staff rating program?


Mr. McCann:: The following are the number of permanent and temporary employees released or downgraded in both the Halifax and Sydney district taxation offices as a result of the staff rating program initiated and completed during the calendar year 1951;
Halifax
Sydney
(a)	(b)
Permanent	Temporary
Employees	Employees
(i) (ii)	(i) (ii)
Down-	Down-
Released graded Released graded . .	3	8	2	2. .	1	4	4	1Total____	4	12	6	3
The taxation division did not initiate a staff rating program during the calendar year 1950.



NATIONAL FLAG

Mr. LaCroix:: 1.	Does the government know of any countries which do not have a distinctive national flag?
2.	If so, what countries?
3.	What steps are being taken by the government with respect to the adoption of a distinctive national flag for Canada as recommended by the national Liberal convention held in Ottawa and the young Liberal convention recently held in Vancouver?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: 1 and 2. No information.
3.	See order in council P.C. 5888, of September 5, 1945.
FALSE CREEK, VANCOUVER-CONSTRUCTION OF fishermen's FLOATS


Mr. MacDougall:: 1.	Has the government made any decision not to proceed with the carrying out of the appropriation passed by parliament for the construction of the fishermen's floats in False creek, Vancouver, to accommodate seine fishing boats, which was contained in the estimates for the year 1951-52?
2.	If so, on whose advice, or on whose authority was such a decision arrived at?
3.	In the event that such a decision has been reached, is the money allotted for this appropriation to be used in some other project?
4.	If so, where, and on whose advice is this being carried out?


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: 1.	No.
2.	Consideration is being given to alternate sites.
3.	No, this cannot be done.
4.	Answered by No. 3.



SAVINGS BONDS


Mr. Maclnnis:: What amount of each series of government savings bonds have been cashed since date of issue in each case?


Mr. Lesage:: Total redemptions to October 31, 1951;
Series I, issued in 1946 Series II, issued in 1947 Series III, issued in 1948 Series IV, issued in 1949 Series V, issued in 1950



$316,606,650 171,356,000 149,307,650 156,412,300 72,932,650' STATUTES OF CANADA-REVISION AND PUBLISHING

Mr. Knowles:: 1.	Has the commission which is charged with the task of revising the statutes of Canada completed its work?
2.	If so, when will the new revised statutes be published?
3.	If not, when is it expected that this work will be done, and when will the said revised statutes be published?
NOVEMBER a, 1951


Mr. Garson:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	It is expected that the work will be completed and published in 1952.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: 1.	Has the federal government made any grants to Canadian universities, during the last twelve months?
2.	If so, to what universities, and in what amounts?


TAXES AND IMPORT DUTIES
Mr. Knight:: 1.	Under what categories are books classed for purpose of (a) sales taxes; (b) import duties?
2.	Are there any other types of impost other than those outlined in question No. 1 levied against books by federal authorities?
3.	What were the total amounts of (a) sales taxes;
(b)	import duties; (c) other taxes, collected on books by the government in each fiscal year since January 1, 1948?
4.	What classes of individuals or what types of organizations are exempted from payment of any such taxes or duties, and on what basis are such persons or organizations so exempted?



HALIFAX AND DARTMOUTH NAVAL BASES


Mr. Balcom:: 1.	How many changes in ranks above lieutenant commander have taken place by (a) promotions; (b) transfers, at Halifax and Dartmouth naval bases since January 1, 1951, to the present time?
2.	What are the names of those promoted?
3.	What are the names of those transferred?
4.	What transportation charges were paid in the case of each person transferred?
5.	What are the names of those retired, and the amount of retirement paid to each?



ARMED FORCES


Mr. Fraser:: 1.	How many of the men and women who are in the armed forces (a) navy; (b) army; (c) air force, are supplied with clothing by the government?
2.	How many pairs of gloves or mitts have been purchased by the government during 1950, and to November 1, 1951?
3.	From what firms were these purchased?
4.	What was the total cost of all gloves or mitts purchased by the government?



ESSEX WEST


Mr. Brown (Essex Wesi):: 1. What positions are established in the constituency of Essex West, for (a) Department of Justice;
(b)	Department of Mines and Technical Surveys;
(c)	Department of National Defence; (d) national film board; (e) national harbours board; (f) Department of National Health and Welfare; (g)
Motions for Papers
Department of Trade and Commerce; (h) board of transport commissioners; (i) Department of Transport?	[DOT]
2. Who occupies the various positions in the said establishments?



IMPORTS, EXPORTS, RATE OF DUTY

Mr. MacKenzie:: 1.	How many pounds of butter have been (a) imported; (b) exported by Canada, during each of the calendar years from 1926 to 1950, inclusive?
2.	From what countries was the bulk of such butter imported?
3.	What is the rate of duty paid on butter imported into Canada from (a) New Zealand and Australia; (b) European countries?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. Diefenbaker:: For the complete file of correspondence respecting each and every person who, to the knowledge of any department of the government, has travelled to (a) U.S.S.R.;	(b) Poland; (c) Hungary; (d)
Czechoslovakia, since the first day of January, 1950, together with a copy of all correspondence which passed between each of the said persons and the Department of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, prior to the issue of passport to each of said persons.


Mr.   Si. Laureni@: I think the hon. member will give me credit for endeavouring to supply all information requested and all documents asked for when that is at all possible, but in this case, speaking for the Department of External Affairs in the absence of the minister, I must oppose the motion, and I think the reasons for doing so will appeal to the hon. member. First of all it would be an infringement of the long-standing practice that passport records are confidential. On these files there are many letters from the R.C.M.P. marked "secret", and that organization would not wish to have them revealed because in some cases they would show the sources of their information.
The third reason is that releasing this information would defeat the purpose of the regulation which came into force on the 30th June, 1951, and was published in the Canada Gazette, No. 26, volume LXXXV, whereby holders of Canadian passports who intend to visit, among other countries, the U.S.S.R., Poland, Hungary or Czechoslovakia are required before undertaking such visits to notify the passport officer here in Ottawa or the nearest Canadian diplomatic or consular officer abroad of their travel plans and of the length and purpose of their visits. The production of this information would, we think, be apt to deter those about whose plans we are most anxious to have information

Motions for Papers
from supplying that information if they felt that it could at any moment be tabled in the house. We think they would be much more reluctant to comply with this requirement.
The publication of this list would involve the names of several Canadians who have very valid reasons requiring them to travel to countries behind the iron curtain, and under present conditions the placing of their names in the list of persons who have given notice of their intention to go there would be apt to cause them some embarrassment among those who did not know the reasons for their proposed visits. I think the hon. member will probably agree that it will be easier for the administration of the passport office and it will help in getting all the information that the office wishes to secure, to continue to treat it as confidential. For that reason I might venture to ask the hon. member if he would not consent to drop the motion at this time.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, if I might be permitted to refer to what the Prime Minister has said, just by way of a preliminary to answering the question he has directed to me, may I say, first, that I did not want, and do not now want, the names of persons going to the U.S.S.R., or to these other countries, who are good Canadians desirous of carrying out official or like responsibilities.
The purpose, however, of the motion is to secure clarification of a question I asked on October 31, 1951, wherein I asked regarding a number of persons who desired to travel to the U.S.S.R., Poland and Hungary; and the answer given was that, from June, 1950, on, when the regulation was brought into effect, to which the Prime Minister referred, there were only eighteen-one to the U.S.S.R., nine to Poland and eight to Hungary.
I have reason to believe that that answer is not a correct answer, and it was for that reason I placed this motion on the order paper. What I wanted to secure was this: a record of the individuals who from time to time leave Canada for participation in any activity sponsored by communist international organizations. For example, I might refer to the visit to the festival of youth, in Berlin, of fifty-five Canadians, of whom twelve were thereafter invited as guests of the U.S.S.R. to tour the U.S.S.R. The Prime Minister has stated that if I press this application it would make necessary the revelation of secret and investigatory reports by the mounted police. That is an argument to which I would be the last one to take objection. In withdrawing this motion and acceding to the Prime Minister's argument in support of the withdrawal, I do ask that the

Prime Minister bring to the attention of the department such persons who leave this country to participate in communist activities abroad, and on return disseminate in this country the propaganda they have secured under schooled auspices.
In view of what the Prime Minister had said, I withdraw the motion. I would be the last to do anything that in any way would infringe upon security.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I thank the hon. member for accepting the explanation given. The answer to his question was that since that regulation came into force there were eighteen persons who had complied with it, and given the information called for by the regulation of June 30, 1951.
Now, the hon. member will realize that when anyone applies for a passport he applies for a passport to travel abroad, and the passport office has only such information as he supplies. The passport does not give him the right to enter a country behind the iron curtain. In order to do that he has to get the visa of the authorities in the country he wishes to visit. We do not get from the countries behind the iron curtain the exchange of information we get from other countries about visas granted for travel in the countries concerned.


John George Diefenbaker: It was a communist
newspaper that gave me information I cannot get here.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: The department would
not have it; and perhaps the communist organization does not give us all the information they gave the hon. member.


John George Diefenbaker: That is why there should be better security measures.


Mr. Speaker:: Then the motion of the hon.
member for Lake Centre is dropped.



USE OF WORD &quot;DOMINION&quot; FOR COMMONWEALTH COUNTRIES

Mr. Fulton:: For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between or on behalf of the government of Canada and the government of the United Kingdom or the government of any other commonwealth country during the last five years concerning the use of the word "dominion" as applied to commonwealth countries. and particularly with reference to any suggested or proposed change or alteration in the description or style of title of commonwealth countries.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, there has been no exchange of correspondence on this subject with the governments of the United Kingdom or other commonwealth countries in the last five years, except for the telegrams exchanged between Mr. Attlee and Mr. Mackenzie King in June, 1947, when Mr. NOVEMBER 21, 1951
Attlee informed the other commonwealth prime ministers that the United Kingdom government was considering a proposal to change the name "Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs" to "Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations", and "Dominions Office" to "Commonwealth Relations Office".
When the hon. member's notice was placed on the order paper we communicated with London to find out if they had any objection to the tabling of these telegrams, and they answered that, while in these particular telegrams there was nothing that would infringe security, for the sake of precedent they would prefer that they be not tabled, and that only the purport thereof be communicated.
I shall be glad to show the hon. member the answer we received to the request that they be published. They also said that as they had transmitted these telegrams to us and to other governments they would not feel at liberty to authorize the publication of the telegrams without first communicating with the other governments, and that on the whole, because the communication had been secret and in cipher, they hoped there would be no insistence upon the publishing of the actual text.
In the United Kingdom House of Commons on July 2, 1947, Mr. Attlee stated:
It has for some time past been clear that in certain quarters both here and overseas the view has been taken that the titles of the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs and the Dominions office are no longer entirely appropriate and are liable to convey a misleading impression of the relations between the United Kingdom and the other members of the commonwealth. His Majesty's government in the United Kingdom have accordingly reached the conclusion that it is desirable that these titles should now be changed, and steps are accordingly being taken for the issue of an order in council under the Ministers (Transfer of Functions) Act to alter the titles to Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations and Commonwealth Relations office respectively.
In reply to a question in the House of Lords on July 1, 1947, when the intention to change the name was announced, Lord Addison stated that the United Kingdom Prime Minister had been personally in touch with the prime ministers of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa on the matter, and that it was clear that they welcomed the change.
Mr. King made a similar statement in this house at that time. There has been no other correspondence but that, and the motion could either stand or if the hon. member wishes to have it dropped I shall be glad to show him confidentially the communications received from London in answer to our inquiry whether there was any objection to tabling the actual correspondence.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Edmund Davie Fulton: The Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) said, if I understood him correctly, that the United Kingdom government indicated they did not wish the text of the telegrams revealed but they had no objection to indicating the purport of the contents. I take it the purport is similar to the announcement made in the United Kingdom parliament to which the Prime Minister has referred. If that understanding is correct, then I believe the motion is answered or it can be dropped.


Mr. Si. Laurent:: The telegrams were
entirely in accord with the statement made in House of Commons at Westminster, and the corresponding statement made by Mr. King in this house at that time.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion dropped,



QUESTION AS TO INCREASE IN BASIC PRODUCTION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Clarence Gillis (Cape Breton South):: Has the Minister of Defence Production noticed that the dominion bureau of statistics' daily bulletin No. 258 of November 20, 1951, indicates there has been no substantial increase in the past nine months in the production of basic steel? Can the minister make a statement concerning the reasons behind that, either now or at some convenient time?


Clarence Decatur Howe: While it is true, Mr. Speaker, there has been no increase in basic steel since a new blast furnace came into production about four months ago, a considerable expansion of basic steel capacity is under construction. The Steel Company of Canada, Limited', will have about doubled' its production of basic steel by the end of 1952 or early 1953. It takes about two years to complete a large blast furnace under today's conditions. There are other minor increases in basic capacity, but the one I have mentioned is the largest now contemplated. The net result of current new construction will be an addition of about 33 per cent to the basic steel production of Canada.



DAIRY PRODUCTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. Earl Cafherwood (Haldimand):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Is the quota imposed by the United States government against such agricultural products as cheese, processed milk and so forth still in effect? If so, has the government made recent representations protesting this action?
1230	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry
Righl Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce): There is an import quota on cheese established by the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States within the terms of the Andreson amendment to the Defence Production Act. There is a complete embargo on the importation of skim milk powder under this act. The importation of other types of processed milk is not affected by the Andreson amendment. There is an embargo on the importation of butter and butter oils, and a quota on the importation of casein under this legislation.
At Geneva in October of this year the contracting parties to the general agreement on tariffs and trade recognized that injury was being done to the trade of a number of countries as a result of this legislation and, further, that this legislation was not in accordance with the commitments of the United States under the general agreement on tariffs and trade. I may say that I attended that meeting personally, and I spoke rather vigorously about the action of the United States in this regard.
This subject will again be reviewed at the next session of the countries adhering to GATT, in the expectation that remedial legislation may have become effective before that time. The Maybank bill, which is a bill to amend the Defence Production Act by the cancellation of the restriction on the importation of dairy products, was approved in committee but was not discussed on the floor of the Senate in the closing days of the last session. The government has some reason to believe that the Maybank bill will be passed at the next session, and that the restrictions and quotas will be removed.



INQUIRY AS TO DUTY-FREE ADMISSION OF COMMERCIAL DRIERS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Joseph McCann: Yesterday on the orders of the day the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher) asked me if the government had considered permitting commercial grain driers to come into the country duty-free, and to allow purchasers some kind of accelerated depreciation. No actual applications for the free entry of commercial grain driers have been received, although I understand that there have been one or two inquiries in this regard.
In view of the present emergency I would be prepared, as applications are received, to recommend to council that these be admitted temporarily on payment of duty on a pro

rata basis, conditional on exportation within six months from the date of entry and on the understanding that these are being leased or rented and not purchased outright. The pro rata arrangement would be on the basis of one-sixtieth of the duty ordinarily payable for each month or portion of a month during which the grain driers remained in Canada, with a minimum of $25 in each case.
In so far as depreciation is concerned, capital cost allowances on commercial grain driers are as follows:
(1)	If a farmer has not elected as provided in section 20, subsection 6, of the Income Tax Act, the rate of 10 per cent is applicable as provided in part 18 of the regulations. That, of course, is known as depreciation on the straight line basis.
(2)	If a farmer has elected as provided in section 20, subsection .6, the rate of 20 per cent is applicable as provided in class 8 of schedule B and part 11 of the regulations. This type of depreciation is known as the reducing balance type.


Mr. Ross (Souris):: May I ask a supplementary question? The minister referred to the [DOT] case of an individual farmer, but will this same consideration apply to farmers' co-operatives or seed exporting firms?


James Joseph McCann: No, sir; that is a company. If an individual imports one for himself, it is duty-free and there is no sales tax. If an organization, group of farmers or co-operative imports one, the duty is 22J per cent and it is free of sales tax.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Monday, November 19, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Cauchon for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Drew, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Quelch.
Mr.  W. Chester S. McLure@Queens: Mr. Speaker, on Monday night last I began to speak in this debate. I had not anticipated, earlier in the evening, having my remarks interrupted by an adjournment, but when the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) came on the scene and made a good fiery speech, I then had the opportunity, following him, of speaking for a few minutes and then moving the adjournment of the debate. I was pleased to give up my time because, on many grounds, I have to give way to the Minister of Public Works. Therefore, I now give the

second portion of my remarks in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from fhe throne.
It is not my intention, Mr. Speaker, to endeavour to deal with the many excellent speeches that have been made on this address in reply. I may say that I have listened to a good many of them and have read the rest of them in Hansard. The speeches made this session were of a high order. Running through all of them might be noticed one bone of contention, namely the high cost of living. Many different viewpoints were taken, but all hon. members finally agreed that the high cost of living was still increasing. It was rather amusing to note the many speeches that had been made by the government members, and how they had to juggle a good deal, in order to satisfy the voice of conscience, when they were representing their constituencies. After all this matter of the cost of living is a serious question. But after debating it to a certain extent, they then had to turn around and obey the commands of the administration when it came to a vote. Consequently, it was rather amusing to note the number who had to juggle with their consciences when they were trying to prove that the cost of living was going down instead of up. To me one most interesting speech was that of the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) himself. The Prime Minister, for his text, took from the speech from the throne one sentence which reads as follows:
The anti-inflationary measures already in force have checked the upward trend of prices of goods and services affected by their operation.
It is unfortunate that it is our custom and practice for the advisers of His Majesty to have items of this kind put into the speech from the throne, because with all their arguments in favour of it, the fact still remains that we have the high cost of living with us, and that it is going up daily. We know that it is going up. We also know that there is some question as to the accuracy of that sentence which I have quoted from the speech from the throne, in view of the facts as we know them today.
When the Prime Minister was discussing this question it appeared to me, as I listened to him throughout his address, that he was taking the role of a high-class lawyer pleading his case and that his whole idea was to secure acquittal in case these anti-inflationary measures did not work as he had anticipated. I cannot deal with all that the Prime Minister said, and I will come now to a few words with reference to the speech from the throne itself.
The Address-Mr. McLure
In its opening sentences the speech from the throne gives the reasons why members were called in on this occasion; and the chief reason was to bring in legislation with reference to the old age pension at age 70 without a means test. I must say, Mr. Speaker, that this was the first legislation I have ever seen in this house that was agreed to 100 per cent by members of all parties, on both sides of the house. It is gratifying to note this fact, because from time to time the Liberal government have claimed that they were the fathers of these security measures. Now, however, as a result of this session, we find that there is an even break for everybody. When the next election campaign comes around, the Liberal candidates will not be able to go out, as has been done by them in the past, and shout from the housetops: "We gave you the old age pension. If you do not vote for us in this election, we will take it away from you." That is one cry they will not be able to have in the next election campaign when it comes along, in 1952 or 1953.
However, the only sting in this legislation with respect to the old age pension at age 70 without the means test is the great difficulty some people are having in securing proof of age. I am sure that the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin) did not wish to make it so difficult for some people. There ought to be some way in which assurance can be given to the department that a man is 70 years of age or over. It is quite reasonable that the government should have certain proof, but why make it so hard to get? Why not accept a certificate, under oath, from several residents, to the effect that they believe that John Brown or Tom Jones is over 70 years of age?
I know of a number of cases in which difficulty has been experienced. Yesterday I had a letter from one man. I do not know how he is going to procure proof of age. He does not even remember distinctly where he resided when the census of 1871 or the census of 1881 was taken. I do not know whether the department will accept the census of 1901 in his case, because he is considerably over the age of 70.
In looking further into the speech from the throne I find that there are several grave omissions with regard to these pensions. One in particular that I wish to mention is this: Nothing is said -about security for the incapacitated and crippled people of our country. The government owes no higher duty to society than its duty of service to the incapacitated and crippled, and those unable to earn a livelihood for themselves. This question has been brought up time and again by many hon. members, including myself, since

The Address-Mr. McLure 1945. It has been brought to the attention of the Minister of National Health and Welfare on many occasions. Different hon. members have brought in resolutions, but unfortunately those resolutions have never come to a vote. The last resolution on this matter was talked out by no less a person, than the Minister of National Health and Welfare himself. A notice of motion to the same effect appears on the order paper this fall. When all other things are being considered so far as security is concerned, it is deplorable that the incapacitated and the crippled are pretty nearly ignored.
On several occasions I have written to the minister and to the department on special cases. All I could ever get back was a deaf and dumb reply. When social security is being considered, surely this class of people should have the opportunity of looking forward to some hope in life, and that they will be taken care of. I could cite many cases, but I shall not do so. I shall cite just one case, Mr. Speaker, that I have brought to the attention of the Minister of National Health and Welfare. This is a young man now 38 years of age. He had been in an accident on a farm when he was about five years old. He is very badly crippled and unable to walk. He had been ill after the accident and never was able to get any education. Consequently, we have a man 38 years of age, badly crippled and with no hope of anything in life. While his parents were alive they provided, for him and took care of him. When they passed to the great beyond he became dependent on the youngest brother of the family, a young man married and bringing up a family of his own. He is just a labourer, who finds it difficult at all times to make a proper living for his own family. But I will say this for him. He is endeavouring to bring all the comforts he possibly can to his unfortunate and incapacitated brother. There are scores of such oases right in my own constituency. No one but the state itself should have to look after these people. I hope that before another session passes something will be done by way of pension, or in some other way, to take care of the incapacitated and the crippled that we have in our different constituencies.
I should like to say a few words with respect to pensions. I want to refer particularly to the retired pensioner, about whom a good deal has been said in this debate. Our province is particularly interested in this because we have a large number of men who have been retired from the railway and from offices of the civil service such as the post office, and others on retirement allowance. A large number of the railwaymen are

having difficulty with regard to their retirement allowances. Railwaymen have to retire at a certain age. Most of them retired under the old law, when their retirement allowance was very small. As I said, they retired at a certain age, according to the regulations of the department in which they were working. At that time they had what they considered was security sufficient to enable them to eke out at least a fair existence. But that was prior to the high cost of living. A large number of these men are today receiving retirement allowances of less than $40 a month, and consequently they find it most difficult indeed even to get the bare necessaries of life. It is true that some of them have reached the age of 70 and will now be able to get the old age pension, but there are still a lot of them under the age of 70, who will be in the position of having this small retirement allowance, and not enough to live on. These are railwaymen who have given of their very best in the service of this country for a long number of years. They were faithful employees. The railway pension fund claims that it can do nothing for these people. However, I find that the railway pension fund does not make the payment direct to these men. The payment comes from the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier). It is up to the government to see that something is done immediately for these men who were faithful to their position when they were in the employ of the railway. Numbers of these men have approached the government at different times. Since they have retired, the men accepting their positions have had at least two or three increases in pay to which they were entitled under present-day conditions. A man in the employ of the railway can always use the big stick to get what he wants, because he has the right to go on strike to make his demands secure. But a retired man has no opportunity of that kind; consequently, he has nothing else to think of now but the question, where can he go to get a little handout from charity to keep body and soul together?
Another class of retired people that I wish to bring to the attention of the government are civil servants who were clerks in the post office and those who were retired as mail couriers last year in my own city of Charlottetown. These men now have a small retirement allowance which would have permitted them to live had the cost of living not gone up so greatly. But the way things are today they find themselves unable to get along, especially the letter carriers and postal clerks who were paid a special bonus during the war. That bonus was cut off

The Address-Mr. McLure
after the war and was not taken into consideration in computing their retirement allowance. Several of these men live quite close to me and I know that they have to go out and beg for jobs so that they can maintain their families. This is another matter that deserves consideration.
I am not going to speak at length about the war veterans because this matter has been threshed out in this house at great length. I agree with all that has been done on behalf of the war pensioners, but I think it would have come with better grace if the government had taken action at the early part of this session or even last year when demands were made by the opposition. They are now being forced to take action and they cannot expect to get much credit from those they have befriended after the demands made by His Majesty's loyal opposition and the other groups on this side of the house.
Consideration should be given to increasing the war veterans allowances. Some people may consider that they can tell when a man is able to work, but in my opinion only the individual himself can do that. I have brought many cases to the attention of the government and I think of one case in particular where I made a plea on behalf of a man who was not able to work. The department claimed that he was employable and the only argument I could put forward was to get him a job which the doctors would agree he could do and we would see that he did it. But the job never came forth and yet they decided he was employable. That is a difficulty in many cases, to decide who is employable and who is not.
Like other hon. members, from time to time I have been asking the government for certain things for my Constituency. For the last two years the answer has been that it was impossible to do these things because the money was needed for national defence. We all know that money is needed for national defence, but the improvement of transportation facilities, the building of highways, the betterment of harbours and such things are all part of national defence.
According to the speech from the throne the government has changed its attitude this year because they are going ahead with things like the seaway project. I was glad to see that, because it indicates that the government is going to take 'on things besides national defence. For a few minutes I should like to direct the attention of the government to some of the projects that have been promised to my constituency and my province. The government has information in connection with these and I submit that they deserve consideration.
First I should like to mention a need for improvement in our transportation facilities. Transportation is a great problem for our province. We now have a ferry operating from Borden to Tormentine where two steamers are giving satisfaction. However they are not able to take care of the traffic to and from Prince Edward Island. Another ferry company, the Northumberland Ferries Limited, operates from Wood Island to Caribou. During the strike a year and a half ago this ferry provided the only transportation link with the mainland, outside of that provided by the airline. Transportation by air is not to be compared with transportation by steamer.
This Wood Island-Caribou ferry has developed considerable business and it provides an essential service to the southern and eastern parts of the island, to the fishermen and to the tourist trade. However, it cannot take care of more than 50 per cent of the traffic that is offered. The result is that tourists from Nova Scotia on their way to Prince Edward Island have sometimes had to wait a day or a day and a half before they could get transportation. The two steamers, the Charles A. Dunning and the Prince Nova, have given excellent service but they are not large enough. As I say, the government has indicated that it is going to undertake projects like the seaway and the Canso project and the building of a large steamer to provide service to Newfoundland, all of which projects are necessary. But the one connecting Prince Edward Island with the mainland should have the endorsation of the government and should receive all possible federal aid. The demands that are made on the government today should be looked into very carefully indeed. I might go on and say a great deal more about the ferry service.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member has exceeded his time. He may continue with unanimous consent.


Mr. McLure:: I thought I had five minutes more.


William Gilbert Weir: You had twenty-five minutes the other night.


Some hon. Members:: Go ahead.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: That is all I will say about transportation. I want to mention the unfulfilled promise of a post office building. Then there is another unfulfilled promise. Both the provincial and federal governments promised faithfully to provide proper harbour communications and improvements and to build a marine railway slip. These were hot issues during the campaigns of 1945 and 1949, and
1234	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Arsenault I should like to have it on the record that these promises are unfulfilled and have been practically ignored by the government. There is another matter that has been ignored which I would have liked to say more about but will merely mention in passing. I refer to the construction of a naval barracks. On three or four different occasions it has been promised on the floor of the house that a naval barracks would be constructed and also an armoury, but there is no sign of either so far. Nevertheless it was announced today that the government is going to spend hundreds of millions to build them in Europe. The naval barracks and the armoury could be built for $1 million even at the present time, and why should we not have them?
Then I should also like to mention the matter of. the railway bridge across the Hillsborough river from Charlottetown to Southport. It provided a connection with the railway line running to Murray Harbour. I understand it is the intention of the Canadian National Railways to rip up this forty or fifty miles of track, ship the rails to some other place, and do away with the railway altogether. I cannot say how true that is but that report is now in circulation. The bridge was condemned and nobody seems to know who owns it, who is going to repair it or when it is going to be repaired. I have a question on the order paper with respect to this matter but it has not been answered yet.
I also intended to deal with the dairy situation. I have not mentioned the matter previously because I have been waiting since the 5th of November for an answer to a question on the order paper. When it comes through I will take the opportunity then to speak on the subject. I should like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me extra time.
(Translation):


Mr. Bona Arsenault (Bonaventure):: Mr. Speaker, the recommendations of the report of the Massey commission, particularly those concerning assistance to the Canadian universities, have recently been the subject of violent attacks both in this house and in certain other placesi. Some of those denunciations are nothing but the most illogical kind of electoral propaganda and boil down to this: It is from Ottawa; therefore it is bad.
Some other criticisms however seem to have been offered in good faith; they are constructive. Those deserve our attention in order, at least, to strip them of the fallacies they contain or of the not easily eradicated prejudices with which they are tainted.
Section 93 of the Canadian constitution grants the provinces exclusive rights in the matter of education. There seem to be no

differences of opinion on this matter. The Prime Minister of this country (Mr. St. Laurent) recognizes it, the Liberal members here admit it and the report of the Massey commission states it in black and white.
Why then are some people seeking, in certain quarters, deliberately to deceive the people of this country, especially the people of Quebec, by asserting wrongly that the federal government is trying to meddle with education, which comes under the sole jurisdiction of the provinces?
Why are they trying to make people believe that the present federal government is a hoarder, a centralizer, robbing the provinces of their rights, that the government is extending its jurisdiction to education in this country?
Finally, why is it that in certain quarters they are crying out that, in so far as assistance to Canadian universities is concerned, the Massey commission is advocating, in its report, an encroachment upon provincial rights?
The Prime Minister of Canada himself, on June 19 last, when he introduced the Massey report, said in this house, and I quote from page 4278 of Hansard:
In making this announcement, I feel I should emphasize that the federal action is intended to provide a necessary supplement to the assistance to universities already made available by the provincial governments, and it is our earnest hope that no provincial authorities will regard this federal contribution as in any way replacing their own obligations to the institutions they have been supporting in the past.
The Prime Minister ended his statement with these words:
I might add that in making these recommendations to parliament it is intended to avoid any possible suggestion that we are interfering in any way with the policies respecting education in the respective provinces. It is for that reason we wish the Minister of Finance to have the power to consult with and get assistance from the conference of Canadian universities for the purpose of drafting regulations that will provide for the allocation of this grant in proportion to the population of each province, and within each province in proportion to the number of enrolments of students of university rank in the institutions. I am sure there can be no suggestion . . .
This was the Prime Minister's conclusion. . . . that in doing this there will be any interference with the absolute autonomy of the provinces and the provincial institutions in the field of higher education.
And was it not the leader of the official opposition (Mr. Drew) in this house who, speaking after the Prime Minister on June 19 last, used the following words:
[Mr. McLure.l

I am sure hon. members generally will welcome any measure of assistance given in this way to the universities of Canada. In view of the fact that on behalf of the party I have the privilege to lead I proposed some time ago that these grants should be made as soon as possible, naturally we will welcome the grants to whatever extent they are made at this time.
I think there will also be general agreement with the view expressed by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) that a method should be adopted which will retain the complete jurisdiction of provincial authorities over education within the province.
However, neither the formal assurances given in this house by the Prime Minister of Canada nor even the statements of policy made by his own political leader are enough for the member for Labelle (Mr. Courte-manche).
Though the member's both feet and perhaps even his head are in the Progressive Conservative party, his restless spirit nevertheless continues to hover in the gloomy shadows of national disunity. Thus it is that he hears voices. And it was these voices, of course, that charged him with the pressing duty of rising in this house, on November 12 last, to denounce in really touching terms the recommendations of the Massey report on assistance to universities.
His speech, like those of many others of the same ilk, can be summarized somewhat as follows: "It originates in Ottawa, therefore it is no good".
His chief, the leader of the opposition and leader of the Progressive Conservative party in this country, stated that it was a good thing, that it was urgent and even constitutional. But the member for Labelle says it is not a good thing, it is neither urgent nor constitutional. There again the Conservative party is playing its usual game: one policy for Quebec and another policy for the rest of Canada.
The poor Conservative party does not seem to have improved much since I left its ranks in 1944. It often offers us very painful sights.
We have on the one hand a leader of the Progressive Conservative party in the Montreal district denouncing the recommendations of the Massey commission as an encroachment on the rights of the provinces, while on the [DOT]other hand, as I say, his chief, the leader of the opposition, speaking on behalf of the party to which the member for Labelle belongs, sees no encroachment at all on the rights of the provinces, but states:
On behalf of the party I have the privilege to lead I proposed that these grants to our universities should be made as soon as possible.
And yet God knows how the leader of the *opposition never misses a chance to bring up
The Address-Mr. Arsenault in this house the question of provincial autonomy, whenever he thinks it will further the aims of his party.
Pity the Progressive Conservative party! It has been shown recently in this house that the foremost care of a section of that party is to make sure that an obsolete colonial designation be eternally affixed to the name "Canada". Imagine! What an awful tragedy for the empire: the word "Dominion" is being removed from our statutes and our country will be known only under its real name, "Canada"! To our Conservative friends, that is a dreadful thing.
To the propaganda directed against the Massey report by the member for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) and others, to the attacks directed against Rev. Father Georges Henri Levesque, one of the truly great men in French Canada, I much prefer the unbiased opinion of the comite de la survivance fran-gaise as stated in he Devoir of June 23, 1951. I quote:
As spokesmen for our minority groups, the committee is very pleased with the basic finding of the report: the need of a dual culture, French and English, in the whole of Canada. It agrees also with the royal commission where the latter recommends that this dual culture should free itself of all colonialism, especially of any American influence, in order to become more and more Canadian in character.
To the charges levelled against the Massey report. I prefer also the recommendations made by the fourth congress of the association canadienne des educateurs de langue fran-gaise, which read as follows:
Whereas the theme of the IVth congress is the assertion of the bicultural character of Canada; and whereas the report of the royal commission on national development in the arts, letters and sciences confirms that bicultural character of the Canadian nation, the association canadienne des educateurs de langue frangaise:
1.	Is happy to note that the report is imbued with spirituality, asserts the spiritualistic basis of our culture, takes a particular interest in minority groups and advocates true Canadianism.
2.	Hopes that, in carrying out the recommendations of the report, the bicultural heritage of the Canadian people will be protected and enlarged, and that provincial rights in the matter of education will be safeguarded.
To the denunciations of the Massey report and of federal aid to Canadian universities, I still prefer the testimony of an independent and highly talented newspaperman, Mr. Lorenzo Pare, L'Action Catholique's representative in the press gallery. He recently 'acted as secretary of an intergovernmental conference. In the November 13 issue of his newspaper he wrote as follows:
That is why the Massey report has aroused intellectual enthusiasm throughout Canada. It is an all-time Canadian best-seller. It is the work of the worthiest representatives of a Canadian "culture" which they earnestly seek to foster.

The Address-Mr. Arsenault
As we will see further in its context, Mr. Pare, by "culture" which he puts between quotation marks, wishes to identify it with "intellectual life". I now continue this quotation:
This report is a stock-taking of our country's possessions in its most concrete aspects, but the vigour of Christian, thought pervades it all, in such a way that the facts themselves are joined together by the same ideal in the fashion of pearls mounted upon a string. It is also the first official harbinger of a policy which gives to French- as well Englishspeaking Canadians a necessary part in the fostering of a true Canadian culture.
In short, the Massey report contains only one conclusion: the Canadian nation cannot exist without a dual culture and even this culture cannot exist, either in Canada or elsewhere, if it breaks off with its spiritual sources.
There, in fact, is the philosophers' republic dreamt of by all Canadians.
Is that what the member for Labelle and other vilifiers of the Massey report call seeds of death? I challenge the member for Labelle or anyone in this house to point to a single paragraph of the Massey report aiming a blow at provincial rights, even if with a magnifying glass they go over the two subjects most directly related to provincial autonomy in the field of education: assistance to the universities and the granting of scholarships to students.
Assistance to the universities on the basis of grants equal to the amount represented by a distribution of 50 cents per head of the population in each province of this country is based entirely upon the same principle as family allowances in this country.
The law grants ownership of the family allowances to the children themselves. The government, however, nominates a responsible person to whom the money is paid and who acts merely as administrator. Such person may be the mother, the father or any other person who looks after the children or even, in certain cases, a welfare institution. The distribution of family allowances has a strictly mathematical basis. There is no discretion in connection with the distribution, the children and parents are not subjected to any test. Thus, the Christian and democratic concept of society and the state has been preserved. There is no danger of jeopardizing the unity, autonomy and liberty of the family. Family allowances are one of the most beneficial measures ever adopted by the Liberal party. However, only children under the age of sixteen can benefit from those allowances.
Assistance to universities, on the other hand, comes as a sort of necessary adjunct to this Family Allowances Act.


Today, because of the economic development that followed upon progressive industrialization, children undertake long studies so as to prepare themselves to earn a decent living in keeping with the standards of modern society. Unfortunately, many of our farmers and workers cannot afford to pay the high price of long university training for those of their children who have special talents.
Realizing this, the royal commission on national development in the arts, letters and sciences recommended federal assistance to universities and the maintenance and enlargement of the dominion-provincial agreement regarding the distribution of scholarships to undergraduates.
In the case of family allowances, the government designated a responsible person, usually the mother, as the recipient of money intended for the children's welfare. The money paid to universities in conformity with the recommendations of the Massey report will benefit students in the same way that family allowances paid to the mother benefit children under sixteen years of age. In this case, the same automatic, mathematical formula is used. First comes a payment equal to 50 cents for every man, woman and child in this country. Then this payment is distributed among the provinces on a per capita basis. Then, within each province, payments are made in accordance with the enrolment in each university.
But that is not all. In order, not only to respect provincial autonomy, but also to ensure the no less real autonomy of the universities, these grants are distributed by a committee made up of representatives of the Conference of Canadian Universities, on which sit representatives of Laval and Montreal universities. Consequently, in the distribution of these grants by the federal government, there is absolutely no chance for discrimination. The teaching staff and students of the various universities do not have to submit to any investigation, are subject to no coercion, to no test whatever. Such guarantees are unfortunately not always provided in grants made by certain provincial governments.
As far as the recommendations of the Massey report on the distribution of scholarships to undergraduates are concerned, their sole effect is to maintain and extend the agreement already concluded between the federal government and the provinces in this respect. However, the Massey report draws an important distinction in the matter of scholarships..

In the case of scholarships granted to undergraduates, it recommends that the present federal-provincial agreement covering the distribution of such scholarships be maintained, but that the number of beneficiaries be increased.
In addition, the Massey report recommends that 20 per cent of post-graduate students be granted scholarships, in order to give all those who have any ability and especially the sons of farmers, workers or fishermen, for whom the cost of education-and by that I mean a university education-is prohibitive, a chance to achieve a university education.
In his speech the hon. member for Labelle deplored, as we all do, the fact that there are so few French-speaking Canadians in the civil service and in the armed forces. I can speak knowingly about this, because from 1945 to 1949, I was a member of the committee of five.
But have the member for Labelle and those who try to depreciate the Liberal government on this account ever tried to determine the main reasons for this anomaly? Has the member ever wondered, for instance, what French Canada has to offer in two of the most important fields of activities in the forces and in the civil service, namely chemistry and civil engineering?
Does the member know that out of a total of 5,000 chemists in Canada, less than 250 are French-speaking? Is he aware that, out of a total of 35,000 professional engineers in Canada, only 1,400 or 4 per cent are Frenchspeaking?
How can you expect our French-speaking compatriots to supply their fair share of engineers and chemists to the forces or to the different fields of the civil service when we have none available? Conditions are the same in many other branches of the federal civil service. We have trained our children mainly for the medical and legal professions and we have not given enough importance to the scientific careers.
Other qualifications being equal, the fact that one is a French-speaking Canadian has never stood in the way of promotion here in Ottawa or in any other part of the country. I want to give credit to our English-speaking compatriots on that score. The successful career of ouir Prime Minister bears witness to this. The main trouble is that our universities have failed to train enough young men, especially in the scientific field, to fill the key positions available in the civil service. The dire straits in which our universities, particularly our French-speaking universities, found themselves prevented them
The Address-Mr. Arsenault from fulfilling their mission in that respect. That is precisely what the Massey report wants to correct by its recommendations.
It is thanks to this federal aid, to the recommendations of the Massey report relating to grants to universities and scholarships that we shall train, in our French language universities, competent men in sufficient number, especially in the field of sciences, so that in five, ten, fifteen or twenty years our French-speaking compatriots will be in a position to claim their share of the key positions in the civil service and in our three armed services.
At any rate, the most violent critics of the government in this connection, have probably omitted to open the Massey report at page 179 where they would have seen that during the ten year period between 1939 and 1949, the students of the province of Quebec more than those of any other province did profit from the generous aid granted by the federal government. As a matter of fact, the following amounts have been paid by the federal government to the provinces to assist students, under the provisions of the vocational education act: Quebec, at the head of the list, has received $566,235; Ontario, $212,955; British Columbia, $188,455; Saskatchewan, $133,515; New Brunswick, $88,760; Alberta, $83,265; Nova Scotia, $45,125; Manitoba, $22,900; Prince Edward Island, $18,110.
Federal assistance to education is not, therefore, a new development and so far Quebec province has had the largest share.
Another reason for our numerical weakness in key spots both in the civil service and in the army is the reluctance of a great many French-speaking Canadians to expatriate themselves by moving to Ottawa.
I use the word "expatriate" advisedly, because when Ottawa is concerned that is the word used by certain French-speaking Canadians from the province of Quebec. Why? Because in that province, for too many years now, there has been preached a gospel of hate for Ottawa and anything that is suggested by Ottawa. The member for Labelle gave us a sample of just that the other day in this house when he assailed as he did the recommendations of the Massey report.
For almost a generation, a state of cold war has existed between Quebec and Ottawa, a cold war instigated, organized and synchronized for the sole purpose of arousing Quebec nationalism to fever pitch in order
1238	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Arsenault to win elections. But this now obsolete trick may not always be successful in deceiving the people.
These prophets of disunity do incalculable harm to our Quebec youth when they teach them that Ottawa is in hostile territory, that it is the capital of national treason, that to accept measures originating here constitutes a betrayal. That is what our friend from Labelle stated in this house the other day, since he used the verb "to betray".
That is not all. In Quebec, people who are interested in perpetuating this cold war, because of their electoral concern and who take on airs 'of offended maidens upon learning of the small number of our compatriots in key positions in the army and the civil service, are often the first ones to accuse of anglicization good and honest French-speaking Canadians, some of whom have made great sacrifices in expatriating themselves to accept in Ottawa a position which enables them to help their compatriots.
They constantly demand that Ottawa open the doors to larger numbers of Frenchspeaking Canadians; they urge their compatriots to accept in greater numbers employment in the federal civil service, but they themselves refuse to come to Ottawa, the only place in the world where they could defend efficiently the interests of Frenchspeaking Canadians. Not only do they reject a duty they wish their compatriots to fulfil, but they stab in the back people who are already here, doing everything they can to foster interests of French-speaking Canadians. Some have spoken of treason. Well, that is treason!
And when one of our compatriots as eminently qualified as the Rev. Father Georges-Henri Levesque, O.P. Dominican, dean of the faculty of social sciences of Laval university, a man whom the Royal Society of Canada recently recognized as one of its outstanding members, whom the government of the French republic made a knight of the Legion of Honour, a man who is a member of the international union of social studies of Malines, Belgium, and to whom three of our great universities, the university of Manitoba, the university of British Columbia and the university of Anti-gonish, awarded1 honorary doctor's degrees, a man so devoted, so sincere, so undeniably qualified and so soundly patriotic as the Rev. Father Levesque, is invited by the

federal government to play such an important part as he brilliantly played as a member of the Massey commission, some people in certain quarters will try to destroy his work, a work pre-eminently dedicated to French-Canadian life and to the survival of Frenchspeaking Canadians-


Mr. Couriemanche:: Is the hon. member
referring to the Father Levesque who, as a professor, was advocating social credit?


Bona Arsenault: I refer to Father Levesque as being the same man from his birth to-this day, because he is an upstanding man who will not bow to the whims of the hon. member for Labelle any more than to the threats of the Quebec premier.
In concluding, I say that Father Levesque is being attacked only and solely for the purpose of lowering him in the esteem and admiration of his fellow citizens, particularly in the eyes of our young men. Well, Mr. Speaker, if there ever was a piece of treachery that is it.
(Text):


Mr. J. W. Noseworthy (York South):: Mr. Speaker, it has become quite apparent in this house that no measure suggested by anyone on this side of the house is worthy of consideration by Liberal members until that measure has been adopted by the government. From the speech made by the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Arsenault) I gather that he at least supports federal aid to education to the extent that the government has granted such aid at the present time. I am happy to find that the government is granting some measure of aid. We look forward to the day when that measure of federal aid to education will be extended and when that wider measure of aid will be acceptable to members of the Liberal party as are those meagre measures which the government has already approved.
I did not rise to speak on the subject of federal aid. I have expressed my views on that subject before in the house. I really rose to support the subamendment moved by the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch), which reads as follows:
We regret that Your Excellency's advisers have failed to compensate the recipients of war veterans allowance for the increase in the cost of living by an appropriate increase in the amount of the allowance.
We appreciate-I am sure that every veteran in this country appreciates-the increase in the disability pensions which was
[Mr. Arsenault.!

announced a few days ago by the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe). As one hon. member has already said in this house this afternoon, that increase would have come with better grace from the government had it come last year when the veterans asked for it, or even had it come in the earlier part of this session. There is no doubt in the world but that the government had not the slightest intention of bringing in that legislation this session when the speech from the throne was prepared. Certainly the government had not at that time reached any decision on this question. When members of the opposition prodded the government on this matter we did get an announcement from the minister after two or three weeks that legislation would be introduced at this session. Even at that time it appeared that the government had not decided what the amount of the increase was to be. The minister was not able to tell us, and it was not until the opposition had been prodding the government for another week or so that we finally learned what the amount of the increase would be.
It is difficult to understand why a government which, on its own initiative, could show its concern for government appointees in the high income brackets, should have to be prodded by the opposition and by veterans all across the country in order to show their interest in the veteran. The same thing had to be done over the years regarding old age pensions. It is difficult to understand why a government that is so ready in some instances to take the initiative in providing for those who really do not need that provision is so reluctant to do something for old age pensioners and veterans and has to be pushed and prodded into action. There is just no good reason why we are not told during this session that there is to be legislation improving the position of those veterans who are receiving veterans allowance. There is just no good reason for withholding such legislation this session, and giving to the veterans nothing more than the meagre promise of a committee to be set up next session. What a solace that will be to hungry veterans and to their children throughout the coming winter. I am sure that when some of these aged veterans, finding themselves and their families in need, turn to the pages of Hansard and see where the minister promised them a committee next session, they will get a great deal of comfort from it. That is the kind of comfort that this government offers to those veterans who are now in receipt of veterans allowance.
The government would have shown much more graciousness toward these veterans had they announced in the speech from the throne
The Address-Mr. Noseworthy that both disability pensions and veterans allowances would be increased this session, and had they brought in their legislation earlier, announcing exactly what the amounts were to be. They would not then have left themselves open to the criticism which has been levelled at them from one end of this country to the other; the criticism that they were holding back that vital legislation until we got a little closer either to a federal or some other election.


Mr. Fulford:: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, don't you think the hon. member is a little too late to interject provincial politics into this chamber at this time, even if it were proper to do so?


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am making the speech. If the hon. member has not taken advantage of the days that have passed to whip up the dying Ontario Liberal horse, then it is his own fault. It is too late for him to do it now. I am not making an Ontario election speech, Mr. Speaker.


George Taylor Fulford: What are you doing?


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am voicing the sentiments that have been expressed to me by veterans living in my constituency, veterans who are receiving veterans allowances and their comrades who are both pensioned and non-pensioned, veterans who tell me what they think of the scurvy trick of leaving veterans allowances to be studied by a committee next session instead of some legislation being brought in at this session.
I just cannot understand the point of view of cabinet ministers who bring in their old age pension, an old age pension which will benefit every millionaire in this country over 70 years of age, which will benefit practically every citizen in this country over 70 years of age except the great war veteran drawing veterans allowance.


Mr. Marlin:: That is not the case, and you know it.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The $40 which he receives for old age pension will, if I understood the minister's statement, be deducted from his veterans allowance.


Mr. Argue:: That is right.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The sum and substance of the matter is that that veteran will be no better off because of the introduction of the old age pension at 70. I have heard the argument raised that these men should not get old age pension and veterans allowance as well because they would be drawing two payments from the government. It has been pointed out to me that there is quite a difference between the man who has paid for a

The Address-Mr. Noseworthy government annuity and the veteran who is getting veterans allowance. I want to state right here, Mr. Speaker, that the veteran who is getting veterans allowance has bought that allowance and paid for it. He has paid for it by service. He may not be getting a disability pension because some doctor or doctors failed to be able to trace the disability back to war service. I say that no doctor can at this far date tell just what has been the effect of war service upon the health of anyone who has seen such service. The men receiving war veterans allowances are getting them because of their service; it is not just something given to them by the government as a charitable gift. Surely they have as much right to that as those who buy government annuities have to their annuities, or as those who have been pensioned because of a doctor's report have to their pension. The government is being very mean to those on war veterans allowances when it deducts the amount they will receive by way of old age pension.
The government have tacitly admitted that they made a mistake in not referring to an increase in basic disability pensions when they brought down the speech from the throne, and they remedied that error later on in the session. I suggest that they now admit tacitly that they made a mistake in not referring in the speech from the throne to legislation in connection with war veterans allowances, and that the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe) graciously accept this suggestion and indicate that the government is willing to bring in such legislation this session. Then the subamendment can be withdrawn. I suggest this in the interests of the many veterans who will not be able to draw much solace from the promise of a committee next winter when they are forced to buy coal and food. The government should give these veterans the assurance that an increase will be forthcoming in war veterans allowances at the same time as the increase in the disability pension.
Yesterday we listened to an interesting exchange between the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) and the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin) on housing. The hon. member for Eglinton was accusing the government of doing nothing about housing, and the Minister of National Health and Welfare was accusing the Ontario government of doing nothing about housing.


Mr. Knowles:: For once they were both right.


Joseph William Noseworthy: They were both right as far as housing goes. It was just a case of the kettle calling the pot black.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Which is which?


Joseph William Noseworthy: It does not really make any difference which is which. The federal government's housing policy has been pretty much of a fizzle. If you do not think so, just go out and try to get a house into which you can take children. As a matter of fact, go out and try to find a house in which you can take anybody. Sufficient statistics have been placed on Hansard to show that next year the housing situation will be much worse than it is this year because fewer houses are being started and built this year. That is right in line with government policy. That is what the government wanted to do. What they deliberately started out to do was to decrease the number of houses being built because it was going to be inflationary. They had no regard whatever for the number of Canadians who need houses; that did not enter into the picture. All they were concerned about was their theory about inflation. According to that theory, if more houses were built it would increase or speed up the inflationary spiral.
A number of changes are to be noted in the government's policy regarding housing and it requires no expert to know what these are. In the first place the government which has refused to apply price controls to everything going into the building of a house attempts to apply price control to the finished product. Builders tell me that they are unable to come within $200 or $300 of the price which the government sets for the finished product because no curb has been placed on the rise in prices of everything that goes into the building of a house. It is a sort of halfway measure, a tinkering job the government has been doing. Unwilling to face up squarely to the problem of rising prices and to apply price control, they tinker with it and try to do the impossible. They get themselves into a muddle, and as a result hundreds of thousands of Canadians' are without places to live.
Another feature of this problem is the setup of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I have said before in this house that this cannot properly be called a government-controlled corporation because it is actually controlled by the lending institutions. They are the bosses as far as Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is concerned. When they decide that they are not going to lend money they do not lend it, and the government is unwilling to put money into such projects. When they decide not to lend money there is no building, as the builders are unable to proceed with their contracts. That is what has been happening. The minister goes on making first one deal

and then another with the lending institutions, but when he issues regulations he does not know whether the lending institutions are going to accept them. It is not the government which decides just what regulations will be binding upon the building industry; it is the lending institutions which have the final say. The minister brings down a series of regulations, and if the lending institutions refuse to adopt them the minister has no other recourse under the policy the government is following but to adjust his regulations to suit the lending institutions. I asked the minister a week ago whether the lending institutions had agreed to accept the terms which he stated in the house would apply to building, and his reply was that the government was still negotiating with the lending institutions. Nearly a month after the minister had issued his regulations he was still negotiating with the lending institutions to discover whether or not they would accept them, and the minister has not yet told us whether or not the lending institutions are accepting the terms which he laid down. Is it not about time that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, a government institution, should be controlled to some extent at least by the government which created it instead of being left so completely at the mercy of lending institutions?
I have another criticism which I am going to pass on to the minister for what it is worth. I do not know personally the president of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I have met him and discussed a few matters with him, but I do not know the man or his capabilities. However, dozens of builders have told me that what we need at the head of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation today is a builder, not an insurance man. I am passing that on to the minister, not as my own comment but as the comment of practical builders who are struggling in the field with the problem of building houses. Whether or not there is any need for that the minister knows better than I.
There is one other matter I want to touch on briefly, the subject of unemployment in Ontario and particularly around Toronto.


An hon. Member:: And Windsor.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Windsor is in Ontario and not Saskatchewan.


An hon. Member:: Hear, hear.


An hon. Member:: Good.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I made the statement in the house earlier this session that the government's policy for combating inflation could only result in unduly increased inventories,
The Address-Mr. Noseworthy cut-backs in production, lay-offs and three or four day work weeks in numerous centres throughout Ontario. I based that statement on trends I had observed when I visited many of the industrial centres of Ontario before the commencement of this session. Two months ago I saw numerous plants that were operating three and four days a week, numerous plants that were laying off help because inventories were piling up, plants that were reducing production; and all this at a time when the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) is telling us that the thing we need to get us out of inflation is more production. The Minister of Finance goes out and calls upon the industrial workers of this country to produce more. Liberal members of the house have been heard to voice criticism of the forty-hour week and to wonder what the country is coming to when industrial workers insist on working only forty hours a week. There is a situation where tens of thousands of workers cannot work any hours during the week, cannot find jobs, cannot work forty hours a week. Some of them are forced to be content with three or four days a week at a time when we are supposed to be spending $5 billion over a three year period on defence production, when we are supposed to need every possible man we can find for defence production. At the same time one of the ministers, I have forgotten which, told us not so long ago that we were not going to have the men and materials to do this and that, that Canadians would be required to reduce their standard of living and do without many of the things they have been accustomed to having. Yet at such a time, as a direct result of government policy, we have more unemployed in the city of Toronto than we had in February, 1950, before the Korean campaign. There is more unemployment than we had during those days when we were debating the unemployment situation and wondering what was ahead of us. Then Korea saved us from that grave unemployment situation.
There is a report of the Ontario section of the national employment service, a summary of which was published in the Globe and Mail on November 17. It indicates that the number of unemployed in Ontario today is 50 per cent higher than it was a year ago. It indicates that unemployment exists in furniture plants, rubber plants, textile factories, firms turning out materials for house construction, and that even skilled machinists are in excess of demand today. What kind of government policy have we that produces such results at a time like this? Why in the world should skilled machinists be unable to

The Address-Mr. Noseworthy find jobs today? Surely there is something wrong with the government or its policy. According to the report unemployment exists in Belleville, London-where 350 workers of one plant are on a four-day week-Ingersoll, Kitchener, Orillia, Collingwood, among other centres mentioned in the report. I think the cut-back in building materials is one of the most serious matters. We need tens of thousands of houses. People are living in garages, basements, attics, trailers, wherever they can get a roof over their heads. Yet the firms producing materials that go into the building of houses are laying off men and reducing production. There is a cut-back in the production of builders' hardware, plumbing and heating supplies, furnaces and radiators, house paints, Venetian blinds and other products mentioned in the national employment service report. Unemployment has extended into textiles. We have lay-offs, short weeks and cut-backs in production in plants turning out carpets, blankets, hosiery, men's shirts, men's hats, work clothes, gloves and the like. Those are not luxuries; they are necessities. On Saturday I visited a retail dealer whose store is filled with workingmen's clothes, shoes, gloves; all kinds of things workingmen buy. He told me business has not been as poor since the thirties; yet we are just a few weeks from Christmas. There has been no improvement in his business because of the approaching Christmas season.
What is the reason for this? Who is to blame? Surely a wide-awake government could have found some means of avoiding a situation such as that. The same condition applies in connection with woollen goods. We are told in the report that Dominion Woollen & Worsteds are discontinuing their branch plant operations at Orillia and Collingwood, resulting in the lay-off of 110 employees in Orillia alone.
I could go on down the list, but for a few moments I should like to refer to the situation in Toronto. According to this report there are today in Toronto seventy-two factories working part time. Here are men engaged in the production of essential goods, goods which help to maintain the standard of living of the Canadian people. Most of those people, I am told, have not registered for unemployment insurance; yet the week before last 2,200 people registered in the Toronto office as unemployed. There were over 10,000 live claims in the Toronto office at the end of October; and at the rate the unemployed are registering in the Ontario office, before winter there will be 20,000 unemployed in that city. That is 6 per cent of the labour force; and the unemployment insurance people say that anything over 3 per cent is serious. Already

over 4 per cent of the total labour force in Toronto are registered as unemployed. Last Monday morning there were over 400 unemployed lined up before 8 o'clock at 174 Spadina avenue. That is a situation which, as I said before, is worse today than it was in the middle of the winter in 1950. Yet these are not the months of the year when normally we have large numbers of unemployed.
Here are some more statistics which apply to Ontario generally and, I suggest, show the situation. Last week 2,117 skilled workers were registered, with only 499 vacancies. That is between four and five skilled workers for every vacancy. There were 1,708 labourers for 300 jobs, or more than five labourers registered for every job available. There were 4,245 more women looking for jobs than a year ago, and there were 1,500 fewer jobs than there were at that time. There were six women registered for every office job available. There were four women registered for every sales clerk job available. There were ten women registered for every factory job available. According to this same report last week in Hamilton alone 2,400 women were drawing unemployment insurance, the largest figure in the history of that office.
Those are facts which should be placed on the record, and I think it is high time the government gave some consideration to overhauling its policy for combating inflation. Had it set out deliberately to budget for a depression it could not have done a better job than it is doing. As a direct result of the government's policy of taxation, restrictions on credit and other fiscal measures, we have a situation developing in which they may cure inflation and they may bring about a drop in prices, but what a price the people of Canada will pay for that cure. Who can say that a cure achieved in that way will be much better than the disease the government seeks to cure?


An hon. Member:: When do the polls open tomorrow?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I must draw the attention of the hon. member to the fact that his time has expired. He may continue only with the consent of the house.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I intend to finish with this statement, that such a policy can lead only to unemployment and a disruption of business. It can lead only to a considerable lowering of the standard of living of the Canadian people. That may well be the government's policy; that may be the government's aim.


Mr. Sinnolt:: On a point of order-


Joseph William Noseworthy: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: The hon. member has been told by the Chair that he has exceeded his time. He has not had unanimous consent, yet he continues to talk.


Mr. Coldwell:: He has finished.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The hon. member is doing the talking now. I have finished.


John George Diefenbaker: I shall not follow my hon. friend's example by any recital of unemployment. He has placed the facts before the house, and they deserve serious consideration. They certainly require an answer from the government. I rise, however, to deal first with the subamendment moved by the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch). I intend as well to bring before the house certain matters peculiarly affecting western agriculture at this time. The subamendment before the house reads:
. . . we regret that Your Excellency's advisers have failed to compensate the recipients of war veterans allowance for the increase in the cost of living by an appropriate increase in the amount of the allowance.
In my opinion that is a subamendment which deserves the serious attention of every hon. member in this house, representing as it does a demand on the part of many thousands of ex-servicemen and women who today are receiving a war veterans allowance that is insufficient. I cannot understand, Mr. Speaker, why there should be any question or any delay regarding this matter. There was infinite delay in the consideration of the general problem of war veterans pensions. I say this, and I think it is a fair statement; that if the hon. members of this house had been given the opportunity at any time during the past two years of voting on the question of whether or not war veterans pensions should be increased, there would have been a vote in favour of it. But the government did not want that done, and there was no vote on that subject. I venture the opinion that if any minister of the crown- and ff~ere are two of them in the house now, the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) and the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin)-were to give the hon. members who support them the opportunity of a free vote on this amendment, it would be carried almost unanimously.


Murdo William Martin: There is nothing but freedom in the ranks of the government members.


John George Diefenbaker: If there be freedom, and one must accept the word of the minister, then it is passing strange to me that hon. members representing other parties than the opposition have not had requests from war veterans for an increase in this allowance. At the last session a veterans committee was
The Address-Mr. Diefenbaker set up, and it met for a considerable period of time. In that committee in May, 1951, the hon. member for Royal (Mr. Brooks) moved an amendment to the effect that the committee be given instructions to consider the basic rates of pension and the War Veterans Allowance Act, and make recommendations in reference thereto. There was a demand, therefore, last session on the part of the war veterans everywhere for an increase in this allowance, yet when the motion was made it was defeated, entirely on party lines. Every government member on that committee voted against consideration being given to the War Veterans Allowance Act, with the exception of the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank). Ever since that time the veterans all over this country have been asking why consideration of this subject has been delayed. Many of them have been denied pensions and are unable to carry on; yet when the subject of war veterans pensions in general is being considered at this session parliament is denied, by reason of the stranglehold by the government on the control of business within parliament and government expenditures, the opportunity of giving to these veterans the money they need today because of the increased cost of living. Why the delay? Another committee is to be set up at the next session. Why not do something at this session?
Do we need a committee of parliament to ascertain whether or not a single veteran who is unable to work can live on $40.41 a month? Do we need a committee to take evidence on that question? Do we need a committee to take evidence on the question of whether or not a married veteran who is unable to work can live on $70.83 a month? Do we need a committee of parliament to ascertain whether or not a single war veteran needs permissive earnings greater than $610 a year or a married veteran needs permissive earnings greater than $1,100 a year? Compared with the number who receive pensions, there are many, many more in the position that, by reason of their service, they are unable to carry on, although they are unable to prove that they are entitled to a pension.
I cannot understand why a matter such as this should be postponed to another session. Many of these veterans who are unable to secure even small pensions will find themselves facing destitution during the coming winter. If the Minister of National Health and Welfare who spoke a moment ago of freedom would recognize this plea and say that no party considerations will enter the vote on this question, but that the government will give that freedom which the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) gave on

The Address-Mr. Diefenbaker the occasion of a similar vote, the amendment of the hon. member for Acadia would be passed almost overwhelmingly.
We can only make the appeal. We can do no more. We can point out the circumstances, just as the hon. member for Royal (Mr. Brooks), the hon. member for Vaneouver-Quadra (Mr. Green) and other hon. members who have spoken in this house have done. We can only bring the situation to the attention of the government. This situation is intensified by the facts cited a few moments ago by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy), because many of those who are unemployed will be veterans, who today deserve more than they are receiving. I think of the men who are denied the war veterans allowance by reason of the fact they are not 60 years of age or are handicapped in maintaining themselves, because they did not serve in a theatre of war or by reason of other circumstances beyond their control. Something should be done to assist these men. The answer given by the government simply is that nothing will be done at this session. Mr. Speaker, the government did not intend to do anything at this session in connection with war pensions or it would have set forth the plan in the speech from the throne, but an aroused public opinion in this country forced the government to act; and may I say that it was aroused as a result of what the opposition members did in this house.


Mr. Martin:: Oh, no.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, if silence will arouse the government, then certainly it can be said that the government members were able to arouse the government by their silence in this house.


Murdo William Martin: The hon. member is a good debater, but that is about the extent of it.


John George Diefenbaker: I did not hear what the minister said.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I said that my hon. friend was a good debater, but that was almost the limit.


John George Diefenbaker: I appreciate the compliment; nonetheless I give the minister, now that he is in a rising mood, the opportunity to say whether or not he, speaking for the government, will give the supporters of the government the opportunity to vote on this question without regard to any party consideration whatsoever. Will he say that a free vote will be allowed? The answer is silence.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Does my hon. friend suggest that when any member of this house comes to

register his vote, he does not use that privilege in accordance with his best judgment in the circumstances?


Mr. Rowe:: That is not the question.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to become involved in any argument such as that. I am asking the question of the minister again, and giving him the opportunity to answer. Will he, speaking for the government, say that a free vote will be given on this amendment? That is the question.


Paul Joseph James Martin: What is the answer to my question?


John George Diefenbaker: I asked a question for the purpose of having this serious matter decided, and the minister was quick to ask another question. Let me answer him on that matter. When the vote takes place on this question will it be coincidence that, without regard to any consideration whatsoever, those supporting the government will almost unanimously vote with the government in turning down this subamendment? I do not like to make predictions, but I think that is one I can make without fear that events will turn out to be other than as I have prophesied. If, on this question, hon. members were given an opportunity to vote freely and uncontrolled, with a realization of what this means to the tens of thousands of veterans across this country, I feel that that vote would be a demand, a request-yes, an appeal-to the government to provide for an extension of the war veterans allowance which today is at so low a rate as to deny the decencies of life to many of those who, by reason of increasing costs, are unable to carry on. I make this appeal once more. On the other hand, if the minister cannot give that undertaking, would he be willing if the subamendment were withdrawn to give the assurance of the government that at this session this matter would be dealt with? That would be a short cut. In other words this war veterans allowance would take its place alongside the war veterans pension legislation and would provide a degree of security which the new pension legislation will indeed provide.
Having said that, I now pass on to a matter that is of immediate consequence in the province of Saskatchewan and generally in the prairie provinces. The matter has been raised previously, but it deserves to be raised again. The situation in which we find ourselves in Saskatchewan particularly-and the situation prevails to a lesser degree in Alberta and Manitoba-is that more than 100 million bushels of wheat are unharvested and lie under the snow, while tens of millions of

The Address-Mr. Diefenhdker
bushels already threshed are in the fields becoming damper with each passing day. This situation amounts to a catastrophe to the western farmer, the like of which has not been experienced in my time; and I believe it demands the serious attention of parliament. Freight cars are unavailable. Branch lines are denied any marketing service whatsoever. In town after town wheat is piling up. No market is available because of the fact that box cars are not available. The answer given by the minister is this: There are sufficient box cars; the crop is being moved at an unequalled rate. Yet the situation continues almost stabilized in its severity.
Three weeks ago I pointed out to the minister that some 528 elevators were plugged. He replied that there was nothing to that statement, that he had no figures which indicated more than one-third that number. The situation is that in practically every town in parts of Saskatchewan the elevators are plugged and the wheat crop that is in the fields is depreciating. The government says ample cars are available. Then who is responsible for the mess in which western agriculture finds itself today?
One cannot put maps on Hansard, but I have before me the latest record showing that the grain tie-up is becoming desperate on the prairies. Hundreds of places are marked in red upon this map indicating elevators without market facilities; and the situation is not waning to any extent. Bast week 663 elevators of the pool were plugged. This week the number is some 643. Those are the highest figures in recent years. As I see it, Mr. Speaker, the time has come to do something that has not been done heretofore in connection with this matter. The Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) said the responsibility for allocation was on the wheat board. If the responsibility for having disseminated marketing areas is on the wheat board, then let this house speak to the wheat board through the mouth of the minister and demand action. I think the fact that this responsibility rests on the wheat board points up the fact that a majority of the members of the wheat board should be producing farmers. This is something we have asked for over the years, but it has been denied us. At this time I think something might well be done by the controller to assure that, if there is a surplus of freight cars on one of the railway systems, they be made available to the other; for certainly on the C.P.R. lines the situation is manifestly worse than it is on the C.N.R. lines.
The third thing I suggest is that even at this time, with tens of millions of bushels of threshed grain out in the fields, something be done to encourage the farmer to
build storage. Storage could be built today if the farmer was given the same incentive to build and the same payment that is made by the wheat board to the elevator companies.
The fourth suggestion is this: Many farmers are in the position today that they have no marketing opportunities whatsoever. Municipalities are unable to collect taxes. The storekeeper is asking that something be done. I suggest that if it is difficult to provide for government guaranteed bank loans against the grain that is in the fields, one way of getting around that difficulty would be to provide for such government guaranteed bank loans to the extent of $10 an acre. Enormous quantities of wheat are on the prairies and will be destroyed whenever climatic conditions warm up, unless something is done.
I think the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) made a worth-while suggestion today when he said that in so far as drying machinery is concerned, it will be allowed into Canada provided that it is on loan for a period of six months. That will go part of the way, but it does not go as far as it should, as was pointed out by the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross), who asked that the same consideration be given to co-operative and other organizations that are in a position to provide drying facilities. Even at this time I think the Minister of National Revenue might reconsider his decision of this afternoon, to the end that provision may be made to enable all of the drying machinery available to be brought into this country without the necessity of there being any payment of customs duties, provided that it is reshipped to the United States after being used.
All kinds of explanations have been given as to why western Canada is in the position it is. Well, one of the main reasons is-


William Gilbert Weir: The weather.


John George Diefenbaker: One of the main reasons is that the government failed to act in May, June and July when there was a realization of the great crop that was expected, with 90 or 100 million bushels of damp wheat still glutting the western elevators. I remember bringing up the matter on several occasions and requesting the minister to do something to remove the wheat from the prairies and so provide storage. The answer was always the optimistic one, to the effect that all would turn out all right. Finally, in their desire to pass the responsibility on to someone else, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), speaking in Saskatoon, said the responsibility for the situation rested upon the western farmer, that his agricultural techniques would have to be changed accordingly. If the minister could read some of the letters I have

The Address-Mr. Diefenbaker received regarding it he would learn that his statement certainly is not appreciated by the western farmer.


Hazen Robert Argue: The horse and buggy minister.


John George Diefenbaker: Oh, yes; back to the horse and buggy days, and everything will be well. Whether or not that was what he meant, certainly the western farmer is aroused as he has not been for a long while oyer being condemned for a responsibility which rests upon this government. The Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) rises from day to day and says that all is well. But letters keep coming in from farmers in every part of the country, advising that the situation is becoming more serious every day. They say it is impossible to understand who are the advisers of the Minister of Trade and Commerce who provide him with the misinformation which he gives to the House of Commons and the country. I read from an editorial in the Western Producer of November 8, entitled "Grain Congestion". After complimenting the Minister of Trade and Commerce as a hardworking member of the cabinet it says:
One is reluctant to criticize Mr. Howe but he has left no alternative. As reported in our news columns-there is no need to go over the details here__he made a statement last week which indicated a deplorable misinterpretation of the present situation in relation to the movement of western grain. While admitting that there is a problem and that there is congestion he proceeded to make light of the whole matter. He seemed to convey the impression that those who were expressing serious alarm at the gravity of the situation were crying before they were hurt; that if they exercised a little patience they would discover that they were really not going to be hurt at all.
We do not know by whom Mr. Howe is briefed, on whom he relies for the evidence on which he bases his conclusions, but we can assure him that he has been badly misled. In recent issues of this paper an accurate picture of conditions in Saskatchewan, accompanied by detailed maps, has been given. These, we submit prove beyond argument that we are confronted with an emergency which may spread disaster among thousands of grain growers, the effects of which will be felt throughout Canada as well as by consumers overseas. Far from being a temporary condition of a seasonal nature there is every indication that it springs from basic shortcomings in the transportation system, long dormant, but which have now come glaringly to light.
Whatever the responsibility may be, and on whoever it may rest, I do ask the government to act, to exert extra pressure upon the controller and also upon the wheat board and the railway companies to assure that the branch lines will receive at least a greater measure of consideration than they have had since the beginning of this harvest season. It is one of the most colossal catastrophes that have ever struck the western prairies. There was a crop the like of which we had not had in our history. There is $200 million worth of crop not threshed as yet, and

approximately $125 million worth out in the fields in piles. I do not say the government can do everything, but they can do something more than periodically issue airily worded optimistic messages that may give solace to the government and its supporters, but no comfort to the western farmer.
One more word, sir, and I am through. I have been very much impressed, as I know every hon. member from Saskatchewan has been, by the number of hon. members from eastern Canada in the opposition who have publicly given their support to the South Saskatchewan river irrigation project. That is not something new on their part. I read in the Star-Phoenix an editorial to the effect that if the same stand had been taken by His Majesty's loyal opposition before this commission was set up the government might have acted. Well, memories are short. Throughout the years when Mr. Bracken was leader of this party this project had his support. In February, 1949, only two and a half years ago speaking in this House of Commons in the presence of and with the authority of the leader of this party we asked the government to go ahead with this work and promised our support. The project would have the support of every member of the opposition. It is part of a great national plan of development to assure productivity on the western prairies, in particular in Saskatchewan, year in and year out, in place of those areas being subjected to continuing drought as they have been since 1890.
At first the attitude of the government was that the engineers had to determine whether or not it was a feasible scheme. Various engineers considered the matter, and finally over a year ago the feasibility was decided upon. The engineers came to this conclusion, and I read from the report:
It is feasible to irrigate about 500,000 acres in central Saskatchewan and at the same time to produce about 475 million K.W.H. of hydroelectric energy annually.
In a return brought down on June 29, 1951, in answer to questions asked by me, there were set forth the advantages of this scheme in so far as population is concerned. Until quite recently the population in that part of Saskatchewan has been decreasing year by year. The facts are set forth in the report of the engineers, which says this will mean a great increase in the income of many farmers. It will mean an increase in population. It will bring about a resettlement of the areas that have been deserted. There will be a tremendous saving in relief expenditures that have amounted in recent years to an average of $368,000. This project is necessary if defence production in this country is to be

redistributed. It is necessary to build up in Saskatchewan a diversification of industry. It will provide water for 500,000 acres which today are productive one year and nonproductive the next.
I have already stated that feasibility was the first question. The Minister of Agriculture then announced that the government could not build these works because the irrigation works would cost some $34 million and Saskatchewan would have to supply that amount. Mr. Douglas, the premier of Saskatchewan, agreed to that.
The next excuse was that the water board which had been set up in the three western provinces had not come to a conclusion as to the division of water among the three provinces. When it looked as though that question might be settled the government said that it would have to be proved and re-proved once more that the project was feasible. They then set up the commission which is now sitting.
I would point out that, regardless of what the commission may decide, no member of the government has made a public pronouncement that if the report of the commission is favourable the project will be gone ahead with. The undertaking will take ten years to complete. It is something that has been dreamed of by the people on the western prairies for over twenty-five years. Its feasibility has been established, and there is no question but that generally speaking it will receive support from the representatives of all parts of Canada. It is a project most necessary to the preservation of Saskatchewan and to provide a fundamental basis upon which to redistribute industry in this country.
I am not going to read from the sessions paper, but it does set forth the situation ii detail and the results of the research tha has taken place in connection with thi: project. This project will spell a tremendou: increase m western income. The populatior in the Lethbridge and western irrigation are; increased by 250 per cent in twenty years During the same period the population ir the part of south Saskatchewan in which thi1 power project would be operative decreasec from 40,000 to 28,000, or approximately 3( per cent. Now that there is such general support the hope of the people of Saskatchewan is that it will be proceeded with. It will take a long time to construct, but it will afford a new basis for unity among the parts of this country that cannot be achieved in anv other way.
I conclude by making once more an appeal to the government to make provision for an increase in the war veterans allowance before
The Address-Mr. G. M. Murray the oncoming winter, even though it be in the nature of a temporary increase based on the cost of living, to the end that the fear that lies in the hearts of many veterans who are denied pensions and are unable to work will be removed.
I ask that the government remove from the hearts of the western people the fear that, having had one of the greatest crops in their history, that may be offset by reason of the failure of someone, somewhere, to provide a measure of foreknowledge after having been forewarned. They are fearful that in place of prosperity they are going to find themselves in a position unequalled since the days of the drought, when crops were non-existent.


Mr. G. M. Murray (Cariboo):: Mr. Speaker, it is most unfortunate that the population of Saskatchewan is not growing. What happens to the Saskatchewan farmer when he leaves Saskatchewan? Very often he goes to Vancouver or some other place in British Columbia and opens up a garage, or he goes up to the Prince George country on the Canadian National Railway and opens up a sawmill; or he may engage in some other type of industry in British Columbia. So far as I have been able to observe in my own riding, he is a most valuable adjunct to the citizenship of British Columbia. In short, what is Saskatchewan's loss is British Columbia's gain.
I do not think the situation in Saskatchewan is as bad as it has been painted by the previous speaker. I remember not long ago looking over statistics which indicated that last year the agricultural production of Saskatchewan was equal to that of all Canada twenty years ago. I do not suppose there is any part of the western prairies as prosperous as Saskatchewan. We would like to see the South Saskatchewan river dam constructed, and we would like to see dams and irrigation works constructed in many places, but that would not change the weather in Saskatchewan or stop the snow from falling upon the harvest. I see a very serious problem to be solved by technical men, agriculturists and others in order that these beautiful harvests that mature in Saskatchewan may be threshed and put into proper granaries so that people there or in any other part of the west will not work against nature but rather will gear their farming activities to nature.
If all that the previous speaker said were absolutely correct I would be very hesitant about proceeding with the remarks that I intended to make this afternoon. I do not come from Saskatchewan but represent a very large riding in the northeastern part of British Columbia. The riding of Cariboo is of interest to the world today because it is a

The Address-Mr. G. M. Murray vast area of land which is rich in natural wealth. Homes can be provided there for the homeless from Saskatchewan and elsewhere, and there will be work and wages for all who come provided they are of sound mind and body and come with a good heart as did the settlers of earlier days. Running through the middle of my riding from north to south there is a highway 850 miles long passing mostly through virgin country. By way of illustration, its length would be about equal to the distance between Ottawa and Halifax, Ottawa and Fredericton, Ottawa and Richmond, Virginia, or Ottawa and Chicago.
The population of Cariboo at the time of the last election was given as 31,000 people, that of a small city in Ontario, in an area larger than all the maritime provinces combined with part of Newfoundland thrown in. There were 13,000 voters in the last election -I suppose there will be more in the next -in the electoral district of Cariboo, an area larger than all of Ontario from Sault Ste. Marie eastward to the Ottawa river. This one electoral district embraces an area equal to all the New England states, equal to the area east of a line drawn between Philadelphia and Buffalo. It is larger than all of New York state with a good deal of Pennsylvania thrown in and all of the original New England states.
It is an area rich in all kinds of natural resources. I have given the list before of the natural resources of the district I represent that are profitably developed. First of all there is gold, which we began to produce in 1858. Each year since then the gold mining industry has been large and profitable, contributing to the wealth of the country. Today in addition to gold we have such things as tungsten, mercury, asbestos and other war minerals. We have coal in the riding at Hudson's Hope and other points equal to the coal resources of the Lackawanna valley of Pennsylvania. There are three small mines operating 100 miles from a railway. The coal is delivered by truck to the domestic market and its value as a heating agent is very much higher than any other coal we have in Canada. It ranks next to the hard coal of the Lackawanna valley.
The 850 miles of highway consists of the extension of the Cariboo highway by way of Pine pass, and then some 500 miles of the Alaska highway. We have between 400 and 500 sawmills, mostly in the neighbourhood of Prince George. They all ship their products to world markets via the Canadian National Railways. There is also a great farming area, including extensive cattle ranches in the south. Dairying is carried on

at places like Prince George, McBride, Dawson Creek and Kersley. Wheat growing in the Peace river area of the Cariboo electoral district takes place at Dawson Creek, the shipping point for the largest production in the British commonwealth. I think the record there was 5 million bushels in one year, and much of that grain was hauled 60, 80, 90 or 100 miles to get to the railhead under a truck tariff of 17 cents per bushel. Then it is hauled from the railhead to the head of the lakes or Vancouver at a very high freight rate. Therefore that part of the country is placed in a position where it needs equalization of freight rates and the extension of transportation services.
In addition there are natural gas wells which have been drilled on that side of the British Columbia-Alberta line. There is a sufficient reserve of natural gas to service a very large city. It is very likely that British Columbia will get an ample supply of natural gas from her own territory up in the Peace river country for the servicing of Vancouver, Victoria, New Westminster, and other large centres. Then there is the recent discovery of oil at Fort St. John. There is a natural wealth in that district possibly unequalled in any similar area on the face of the earth, in which a population of a mere 30,000 people share.
Within the Cariboo electoral district there is hydroelectric power which has not been developed. Some 3 million horsepower is to be developed as the result of the St. Lawrence deep waterway project. On the Fraser river alone there is a potential of 6 million horsepower. That river commences around the base of Mount Robson and winds down through the territory of Cariboo to its mouth at New Westminster. Three million horse power is now being developed on the Nechako river within the electoral district of Cariboo by the Aluminum Company of Canada. There is another million horsepower on the Peace river, and no one knows how much more there is below Fort St. John and on toward the north. I doubt whether any survey has ever been made of the Nation river, the Parsnip river, the Fort Nelson river, the Liard river, the Muskwa river and others which rush down from the Rocky mountains to join the Mackenzie system and then on to the sea. Farther south the Quesnel and Blackwater rivers have been surveyed and are under review now for development. Therefore there is a vast reserve of power for the development of the natural resources I have mentioned within that one electoral district in the northeastern part of British Columbia.

World events have great meaning to us in Canada today and especially to those in the northwestern part of this continent. We are on the airways to the Far East. The Pacific ocean is our natural trade outlet. As we all realize, the world is shrinking so far as travel is concerned. Today men come and go across the Pacific ocean at regular intervals in a matter of hours where formerly the journey took many weeks. I do not need to refer the house to the disturbance now going on in Asia, the war in Korea and the turbulent condition of affairs there. Then may I tell you that the northwestern part of British Columbia, the Yukon and Alaska are the first defences in the event of any invasion from Asia. At the western limits of Alaska one may look across the sound and see the territory of Siberia. Our fliers know the airfields which have been built up along the Siberian coast, on Sakhalin island, and on those other islands on the northern coasts of Pacific Asia. I do not need to lay emphasis upon the critical times in which we live, nor do I need to refer to the situation in Europe where there is a smoldering fire. We have sent a brigade of soldiers to western Europe, and it is very interesting to know that at the head of that brigade is Brigadier Geoffrey Walsh, a most distinguished soldier, a native of St. Catharines, Ontario, a man who is peculiarly well acquainted with all the information I have been giving the house this afternoon about my riding. Brigadier Walsh was in charge of the Alaska highway, and was connected with the defences in the northwestern part of the country. He has travelled by jeep, by horseback or by foot oyer most of the area to which I am referring. He is a man who has had a most unusual experience. He was taken by the government of Canada from the Alaska highway, with his headquarters at Whitehorse, and sent to China. This was not long ago, but of course it was before Korea. I do not suppose there is any man in the Canadian army who is better versed with respect to the military situation in China than is Brigadier Walsh. It is a strange destiny that now sends him to Europe, there to head our Canadian military effort.
If we are going to defend this continent we cannot allow the northeastern part of British Columbia to be a vacuum. We cannot allow those great valleys to lie idle, those resources to lie undeveloped. In the world today, if there is one contribution we could make toward peace it would be to open up those valleys and settle them with people from England, Scotland and western Europe.
I hope that when Brigadier Walsh is in Europe he and all his officers and men will constitute themselves as immigration officers
The Address-Mr. G. M. Murray for Canada, telling people wherever they go' about the opportunities and possibilities for settlement up in the northwestern part of this great Canada of ours.
Two or three speeches have been made recently that have been of considerable interest to me. One was that of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) in which he referred to railways which were now under advisement and being constructed throughout Canada. He referred to the iron ore road up in Quebec, the new nickel extension at Lynn Lake in Manitoba, and the extension of the Canadian National to be established between Terrace, which is just west of my riding, and the new town of Kitimat on the Pacific coast, where shortly a population of 7,500 people will be employed in the new aluminum industry being developed at that point.
I was glad to hear the minister also make reference to the extension of the Pacific Great Eastern Railway which is being built, by the government of British Columbia in my riding north from the town of Quesnel to Prince George. I am sorry he did not go further in his speech and say that he intended to encourage Premier Byron I. Johnson of British Columbia to build that railway right up to the Peace river country. Indeed he should go further than that and implement the studied recommendations of all the leading military men, both in Canada and the United States, that a railway should be extended from Prince George not only to the Peace river country, but right up through the Yukon to Alaska, so there may be adequate defence of this continent should the evil day ever draw nigh.
The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) made a most interesting speech the other night which, to some extent, filled me with gloom, as did also the speech this afternoon of the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Die-fenbaker). I refer to that point in the minister's speech where he stated that the government of Canada proposed to buy 10 million pounds of buffer between now and the end of this year. Knowing my district as I do and knowing Saskatchewan as I do, I feel the people of Canada should not be buying on the world market at this time 10 million pounds of butter, but rather they should be offering a surplus of butter to the markets of the world. More feed will be wasted on the plains of Saskatchewan this winter than would make 10 million pounds of butter.
You cannot blame the government for that, either. I say we need more people in this country. We need settlers, people who will help develop the dairy industry. There is a


Mr. Hansell:: Mr. Speaker, this is Wednesday night, and the clock has reached five minutes after six. We rather look forward to an evening off once in a while, and I would ask that we adjourn the debate.
On motion of Mr. Hansell the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Fournier (Hull) moved: the adjournment of the house.
He said: Tomorrow we shall take up third reading of Bill No. 19, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act; then the resolution concerning financial matters; Bill No. 10, an act to approve the financial agreement between Canada and the United Kingdom; Bill No. 20, to implement the international convention for the regulation of whaling, and Bill No. 14, an act respecting the surveys of public lands of Canada.
Motion agreed to and the house adjourned at 6.05 p.m.

Thursday, November 22, 1951